IFF Non Call

[emaxos]

Watching 14U Rec game. R1 and R2, 1 out. Batter pops ball up between pitcher and F4.
F4 makes no move on the ball and pitcher makes a nice over the shoulder catch.
No harm, no foul.
Defensive coach asks, "wasn't that an IFF"?
PU says no - in his judgement ball wasn't catchable.
We chatted after the game.

Question I have is, should the competence of a fielder be considered when judging the IFF?
The ball clearly could have been caught by F4 with ordinary effort but she just froze on it. That was a factor in his judgement of "uncatchable".

[whiskers_ump]

Originally posted by emaxos
Watching 14U Rec game. R1 and R2, 1 out. Batter pops ball up between pitcher and F4.
F4 makes no move on the ball and pitcher makes a nice over the shoulder catch.
No harm, no foul.
Defensive coach asks, "wasn't that an IFF"?
PU says no - in his judgement ball wasn't catchable.
We chatted after the game.

Question I have is, should the competence of a fielder be considered when judging the IFF?
__________________________________________________ ______

No, besides, unless I call a team several times, I would not know the competence level.
__________________________________________________ ______

The ball clearly could have been caught by F4 with ordinary effort but she just froze on it. That was a factor in his judgement of "uncatchable".

__________________________________________________ _______
Judgement Call, He called what he thought.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by emaxos
Watching 14U Rec game. R1 and R2, 1 out. Batter pops ball up between pitcher and F4.
F4 makes no move on the ball and pitcher makes a nice over the shoulder catch.
No harm, no foul.
Defensive coach asks, "wasn't that an IFF"?
PU says no - in his judgement ball wasn't catchable.
We chatted after the game.

Question I have is, should the competence of a fielder be considered when judging the IFF?

Competence, no. Ability to make THAT catch with ordinary effort, yes.

The ball clearly could have been caught by F4 with ordinary effort but she just froze on it. That was a factor in his judgement of "uncatchable".

How could F4 make the catch with ordinary effort if they displayed no effort at all?

[rwest]

Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA
How could F4 make the catch with ordinary effort if they displayed no effort at all?

IMO, its a judgment call. The definition says an IFF is a "fair fly ball which can be caught with ordinary effort". The ball does not have to be caught. I believe the decision is based on what effort is required by an infielder. Modify the scenario just a bit. Suppose F4 didn't freeze, but she saw F1 was going for it. If in the umpires judgment F4 could have made the play with ordinary effort, then its an IFF, regardless of who actually made the catch.

The definition also states that an infield fly is determined based on the position of the closest fielder when the ball is at its highest point. Is it not conceivable that you could make this call before a fielder even makes an effort to catch the ball? Suppose F4 didn't even have to move to get under the ball. Would you call an IFF at the top of its arch even if F4 has not raised his glove? He hasn't made an effort yet.

Would you rule IFF in this situation? Co-ed, SP. Weak hitter at bat. Outfield playing very shallow. Runners at 1st and 2nd with 0 outs. Pop fly hit to just behind 2nd base. All the F4 had to do was take two steps back and he'd be under it. However, since the outfield was playing shallow, F8 made the catch. That's still IFF by rule. It has all the necessary requirements:

1. Runners at 1st and 2nd
2. Less than 2 outs
3. Ball COULD have been caught with ordinary effort by an infielder. It doesn't matter that F8 caught the ball.